I’m re-posting the following article from 2008. I have heard some argue that we should give feminism credit for many of the liberties that women enjoy today. However, we must remember that God’s ways are not our ways (Is. 55:8). And if we attempt to correct sin by using man’s methods, we implement only temporary “fixes,” while introducing new, and sometimes worse, problems. I believe this is true of feminism.

Feminism was a bandaid that carried it’s own germs, and caused a new infection in our land. Jesus is the great Healer.

“Despite the anti-Christian prejudice evident in much of the feminist movement, it is to the teachings and example of Jesus Christ that women owe most of their freedoms. The advent of Christianity raised the dignity, freedom and rights of women to levels never before known in any other culture or religion. Indeed, as one historian put it: ‘The birth of Jesus was the turning point in the history of women.'” – Dr. Peter Hammond

On our way home from church this evening, I glanced over at my tired husband who was driving our large crowd home. Today he delivered a sermon (The Christian Husband, Leading and Loving) that made me realize just how completely Jesus “set the captives free.” Yes, He set free the captives of addiction, of prostitution, of despair, of hopelessness. He broke the chains of perversion, hatred, and bitterness. He set us free of sin – the cruel master we so willingly served – and so desperately hated. Now we gladly—and thankfully—serve the King of Kings.

But, ironically, as women, He set us free in another way too. Many feminists rant about the oppression biblical teaching places upon women; but, Christianity is what freed us from that oppression! Why then would we want to place upon ourselves newly forged chains of egalitarianism? Chains that strip us of the very protection that Jesus intended us to have. While claiming freedom and equality, the irony of the deception is that they are heading for slavery!

Our God is a creative God. He has made us each so unique and, in His wisdom, given us such wonderful roles. His created order is a stunning choreographed work of artistic beauty. As husband and wife, we complete one another in amazing ways. Why do we continue to insist on questioning His work—and cheapening His masterpiece?

As a result of the teachings of Jesus Christ, women enjoy far better treatment than they have ever before known. But even today, in countries where Christianity has very little influence, women are treated as animals and slaves—sometimes even worse.

Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist countries are known for their shameful and degrading treatment of women. Not only is polygamy, “temporary marriage,” clitoral mutilation, foot binding, and female slavery still practiced in many of these countries, there is an attempt to revive the barbaric practice of “suttee” (the burning of widows) in India. To this day, there are reports of unpunished public beatings, abuse, rapes, and even murder against women.

A glimpse into the past, into Ancient Rome, reveals that sexual faithfulness in marriage was virtually unknown—at least for the man. (Roman lex Julia de Adulteriis) While a man could divorce his wife for her unfaithfulness, it was not considered wrong for a man to commit adultery, unless the act was committed with another man’s wife (property).

“Christianity greatly elevated the world’s sexual morality. By opposing adultery, fornication, homosexuality, child molestation, bestiality, and other sexual decadence, Christianity made a contribution to civilization that was unprecedented. It was the result of the tireless work of Christians that by the 5th Century the wife was able to divorce an adulterous husband, something which had never before occurred in the Ancient World.” (The History of Marriage, by Edward Westermarck

The decadence and wickedness of Ancient Rome was so vile that I won’t go into the details here, but you can get a clearer picture by reading Dr. Peter Hammond’s article, The Christian Liberation of Women.

Jesus came with shocking and scandalous commands! What must the people have thought! This rebel! This radical! How un-mainstream of Him! Can you imagine how offensive His message was to such a perverse people?

“So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church.” (Ephesians 5:28-29, NKJV)

“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her.” (Ephesians 5:25, NKJV)

What? A man must love his wife and lay down his life for her? For her—a creature to be used for man’s base pleasure? Not only would a Roman Christian, immersed in Roman culture, have to give up all of his vile pleasures and practices, but he would have to change the way he treated his wife? Wow!

“As a loving deer and a graceful doe, let her breasts satisfy you at all times; and always be enraptured with her love. For why should you, my son, be enraptured by an immoral woman, and be embraced in the arms of a seductress?” (Proverbs 5:19-20, NKJV)

So, not only does he have to love her and sacrifice for her, but he has to be faithful to her too? And enjoy it?

What if he doesn’t love her as Christ loves the church? What if he neglects her, abuses her, cheats on her, forgets her? Who would know? Poor guy – he’s just part of the culture.

“And this is the second thing you do: You cover the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping and crying; so He does not regard the offering anymore, nor receive it with goodwill from your hands.

Yet you say, “For what reason?” Because the Lord has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, with whom you have dealt treacherously; yet she is your companion and your wife by covenant.

But did He not make them one, having a remnant of the Spirit? And why one? He seeks godly offspring. “Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth.” (Malachi 2:13-15, NKJV)

More than caring for us and being sexually faithful to us, our husbands are commanded to dwell with us in gentle understanding and to give us honor (1 Peter 3:7). Then they’re reminded that we are heirs together of the grace of life – and that ignoring this will hinder their prayers! Find THAT in the Qur’an!

If present anti-Christian trends continue one could see a return to the previous pagan abuses of women. Those advocating pornography, sexual permissiveness, homosexual “marriages”, legalized prostitution, lowered age of consent and the decriminalization of adultery are not offering us progress but only a return to pre-Christian paganisms. – Dr. Peter Hammond

This is an article (link above) on feminism as I remember it back in the 60's. (Did you know that the baby-boom did not invent feminism — not even the 3rd wave? Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan and Simon De Bouvour were of the builder generation and before as were so many who led my baby-boom generation astray, and we unfortunately followed them — I thought we'd invented all that stuff!!)

Stacy, you do not have to publish this comment. If you get a chance, please read the article. P.S. I am of course not a professional writer.

Thanks for posting my comment, Stacy. I am the one who wrote the article in the link. (I forgot to mention that) about how I remember the feministic climate back in the 60's. Wish I had a professional editor…sigh.

I maintain that the original feminist movement was a God-send, giving women the vote, jobs as doctors, writers, scientists and more. I believe God always intended women to have this autonomy. Of course there are still crimes against women today; no one expected it to make the world perfect! But it has vastly improved. True, though, that if God's Ways had just been followed from the beginning, we wouldn't have needed this protest; women would have been properly honored already, in church, home, and the workplace.

Thank you Stacy, your root message here about God I agree with totally.

Stacy, thank you for coming to my blog and reading the article. I wrote it about a year ago and have republished it on one my secondary blogs, as you saw. I have edited it to make it a little clearer and to correct the typos!

We do owe a lot to the women I believe to be the true feminists…Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and their sisters. They worked so hard to improve the conditions of women and to give us the right to vote. Best of all, they were pro-life!

The feminists of the 60s hijacked their hard work, making feminism a dirty word.

Your post is excellent, Stacy, as usual. You hit the nail right on the head. I also enjoyed the article you linked to and saved it in my favorites. I enjoy hearing Dr. Schmidt (quoted in the article) on Issues, Etc.

Lindsey – You have stated that you are already confident (based on your research of the GS's beliefs) that you need to part ways with this radical feminist movement. I think you've made a wise choice. Not sure, as a Christian, how you could have done anything else.

"We do owe a lot to the women I believe to be the true feminists…They worked so hard to improve the conditions of women…"

If we owe anything to these women, it's not because of their "feminism." If my husband and I go to Africa and speak out against the injustices done to women and children, or rebuke the men there who sit on their bottoms while the women do all the work, it doesn't make us "feminists," it makes us Christians. I speak out on behalf of the Lord, not feminism.

Well, I think that there has been some white washing of the history of Christian feminism going on.

I used to think that the early feminists were mostly Christian in focus with their main concerns being the health and welfare of women and the family. I'm not so sure about that anymore.

Do a study of the inovlvement of Christian feminists in the eugenics movement, for example. One may find some ethnocentrism and even racism if one looks closely enough.

The early feminists were mostly concerned about white women getting the vote. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony opposed the 15th amendment because it did not include women. If women couldn't have the vote, they didn't want African American males to have it either.

Yes, they may have done some good, but they were not the saints that some would have us believe them to be.

Suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton was an example of a discontented housewife who was ruled by her flesh. In a letter to her close friend and fellow suffragist, Susan B. Anthony, Mrs. Stanton complained:

I pace up and down these two chambers of mine like a caged lion, longing to bring to a close childrearing and housekeeping cares. I have other work at hand…. Oh how I long for a few hours of leisure each day. How rebellious it makes me feel when I see Henry going about where and how he pleases. He can walk at will through the whole wide world or shut himself up alone, if he pleases, within four walls. As I contrast his freedom with my bondage, and feel that because of the false position of women I have been compelled to hold all my noblest aspirations in abeyance in order to be a wife, a mother, a nurse, a cook, a household drudge, I am fired anew and long to pour fourth from my own experience the whole long story of women’s wrongs.

…Matthew Henry wisely said, “Virtue is a penance to those to whom home is a prison.” If we view our God-given role as a punishment to women and the domesticity of the home as a cage, we—like poor Mrs. Stanton—will indeed find ourselves in misery and lacking the virtue needed to truly love, obey, trust, and serve the Lord.

The Christian feminists have one focus and that is women's issues. It is hard, if not impossible, to get a Christian feminist to see any other issues, even ones involving children.

What happens when the empowered woman uses her new status as an excuse to abuse others? What happens when the empowered mother decides to leave the home in order to go out and "find herself"? What happens to the husband of an empowered wife who demands respect from him, but shows no respect for his masculinity?

I could go on. These are questions that the Christian feminist does not seem to have an answer to.

That is not necessarily true of egalitarians. Many egalitarians or egalitarian-leaning women are also stay at home moms and even home school.

I am just wondering how Christian feminists would handle the misuse of empowerment. Of course, the female empowerment model has nothing to do with Biblical Christianity, but still the question remains and begs for an answer. What about empowered Christian women who abuse their power?

Dr. Hammond said:If present anti-Christian trends continue one could see a return to the previous pagan abuses of women.>>>>

That is what we are seeing right before our eyes here in our own culture. As we abandon Christian feminine values of modesty and chastity, young women are more and more willing to give away their bodies outside of marriage to some young predatory male, or female, or group of males and females withouth knowing what the consequences of that behavior will be.

As young women are taught more and more to be independent, even rejecting proper male protection, they expose themselves to greater and greater dangers. They are more likely, not less likely, to be abused or exploited sexually.

I could go on, but I think that we all know what the unintended – or maybe intended in many cases – consequences of feminism have been if we will just open our eyes and look around. I haven't even mentioned the effects of the abortion industry on the female psyche.

Thank God that He is raising up an army of Christian women who reject the feminist model and embrace their God-ordained role as wife, mother, keeper at home and teacher of younger women to love their husbands and children.

Webfoot, I know your own daughter is a teacher in Spain; I see that as quite independent, perfectly acceptable for a grown woman. Rest assured that my statements on early feminism are based on research. Feminine beauty has nothing to do with touting a male everywhere with you.

Wow. Very true and thank you. Rest assured not everyone in the QF movement's like that, but unfortunetly some are and I've been very wary of those who most strongly support the Dominion theology. God bless you in your struggle and triumph.

Welcome to my blog. I'm sorry you seem to have had a bad church experience. You said:

"However, there are many Christians who are attempting to shackle women again. This happens behind the veil of so-called "biblical patriarchy," the Quiverfull movement and Dominion theology."

I'd like to verify what you mean by "behind the veil of so-called…" Do you mean there are disingenuous people using these three labels falsely? Depending upon how I understand you, your statement could seem accusatory and very sweeping. It could also come close to slandering large groups of brothers and sisters in the Lord. So, I’m hoping you’ll confirm that I am misunderstanding you. Labels can be dangerous things. You may be interested in my post that talks a bit about the “quiverfull” label: http://yoursacredcalling.blogspot.com/2009/11/jesus-full.html.

You also said:

"I know this because I know their stories. And my story echoes theirs."

I’m not sure who “they” are. But I’m assuming you’re talking about someone who has been in some sort of religious group that you (and they) perceive as abusive. But surely you agree that you don't actually "know" their stories. There are plenty of people who would say the same thing about Christianity. "I used to be a Christian, but they were just a bunch of hypocrites." or "All the Christians I've ever known cheat on their wives and steal when nobody's looking."

Obviously, that isn't true of all Christians – it may be that the witness simply experienced a handful of false Christians (and I'm sure they could get online and find other "witnesses" who would agree with them about “all” Christians, or even “most” Christians).

Other times the witnesses are simply false. They may have felt convicted by Scripture, or by the lifestyles or words of the Christians they knew, and are now bearing false witness against them in anger. Who knows! But their personal experience certainly doesn’t define an entire group.

I'm not sure what Mrs. Webfoot's daughter has to do with this conversation. Teaching children in Spain doesn't make one a feminist. I'm sure that's not what you were implying, but let's stay on topic. That way it won't seem like anyone is trying to get personal.

I think it's clear I didn't speak of your daughter in a disapproving tone, Webfoot. You spoke of women being independent as part of feminism; I say it's part of growing up, as being without male protection often is. Your daughter is a fine example of mature independence; this was my point.

Jennifer, that's fine. One's children should not be brought into the comment section on someone else's blog, IMO, but I appreciate it that you do not disapprove of my daughter. I'm not sure why that is relevant.

Jennifer:You spoke of women being independent as part of feminism; I say it's part of growing up, as being without male protection often is.>>>>

I respect your opinion. However, I think that it is safe to say that Biblically, independence is part of rebellion. Eve got into trouble when she acted independent of her husband. Adam got into trouble when he acted independent of God. You could say that Eve was also acting independent of God as well as of her husband.

Adam did not spend even one day as an independent, single man. Eve was married from the moment she was given life. We do not know when that marriage was consumated, but I am pretty sure it was on the 6th day of creation.

Satan had fallen into the same trap of independence from God and got thrown out of Heaven.

I would suggest that interdependence is a sign of maturity, not independence per se.

The independent woman says that she needs no one to help her get to where she is going. She does her thing. She is like the independent man who just does what he pleases. She is woman and she roars. She is not mature.

I do not think that independent males are mature, either.

Jennifer:Your daughter is a fine example of mature independence; this was my point.>>>>

I am not sure why you are using my daughter to make a point. FWIW, she is an interdependent person – neither dependent nor independent.

I could give you examples, but since my daughter is not the subject of this post, maybe we can not mention her again? Okay?

FWIW, she is 25 and is saving herself for marriage. She is a strong Christian and a fan of Dr. Laura. She is not a feminist.

Stacy: Thank you for your response. To answer your question: "Do you mean there are disingenuous people using these three labels falsely?"

No. I mean there are genuine people using these labels definitively. And they are engaging in the hurtful mistreatment of women and children. As far as sweeping pronouncements go, your entire post is a sweeping pronouncement against feminists–with patriarchy as the antidote. Which is fine except me pointing out that there are hurtful elements inside patriarchy hardly qualifies as a "slanderous" generalization.

Also, I didn't "perceive" my experience to be abusive. It was abusive. Period. I grew up with friends and family members who lived through the same thing–therefore, I do know their stories since I was an eyewitness to their lives. But it's interesting that you tried to discredit what I know by placing the word know in quotes (as if it's pseudo-knowledge) and then comparing it to some irrelevant analogy like ex-Christians saying all Christians are hypocrites.

These aren't "false witnesses" I found online. These are flesh and blood human beings with whom I had intimate relationships.

I will close by saying that I have read your book and followed your blog for over a year. I have taken my time to try and fully understand your perspective. I have to admit that I'm not entirely surprised by your response–after all, you do have a vested interest in defending patriarchy. I mean, Vision Forum published your book!

Elizabeth said: “No. I mean there are genuine people using these labels definitively. And they are engaging in the hurtful mistreatment of women and children.”

I have no doubt that there are genuine people using these labels; however, if they are being abusive and mistreating women and children, they are using the labels falsely. Or the labels have nothing to do with their abuse.

Biblically speaking, a father-leader (patri-arch) is commanded by God to love and lay down his life for his wife – not mistreat her. So true patri-archy would protect and cherish women and children – sacrificing for them daily.

The difference is that I am describing a false teaching and why it’s wrong. I'm not saying all feminists have wicked motives. I have no doubt that there are feminists who are good people, doing good things. And while I know for a fact that there are children (and even husbands) who have suffered abuse at the hands of feminists, I’m not going to state that “feminists are abusive” (as you have stated about other groups.”

I will simply say that feminism, which claims there should be no role distinctions between men and women within the family, society, or church, is a false teaching.

Again, the Bible is clear that women are of equal value and intellect, but God has created us with distinct physical and emotional differences, as well as distinct roles within the family, society, and church.

Elizabeth said, “Also, I didn't "perceive" my experience to be abusive. It was abusive. Period. I grew up with friends and family members who lived through the same thing–therefore, I do know their stories since I was an eyewitness to their lives”…. These aren't "false witnesses" I found online. These are flesh and blood human beings with whom I had intimate relationships.”

Elizabeth, I apologize if it sounded like I didn’t believe your situation was abusive. I don’t know you or your family and would never try to minimize or question the legitimacy of your claims.

I was not trying to discredit you or your testimony. The reason I put quotes around the word “know” was because I was trying to understand who the “they” was and whose story was “their story.” You used a lot of pronouns, so I couldn’t tell if you were being general (since your comment started out that way). I had no idea you were speaking of specific individuals in your own family. Again, I apologize for not communicating my question more clearly.

I did not use the analogy in reference to your personal testimony, I used it because I assumed you were coming to conclusions based upon random testimonies on the Internet. I have personal reasons for assuming this; however, I shouldn’t have made such an assumption about what you were saying, without waiting for you to clarify that.

Again, I am very, very sorry for anything you or your family may have suffered. I know it happens. I’ve even experienced it myself at certain churches. However, please remember that sin is to blame, not biblical teaching. Men who are tyrants can certainly twist Scripture to mean all sorts of convenient things. The Bible warns us to beware of such men. But we need to be careful not to be reactionary. (Continued in next comment)

I will not say “biblical patriarchy” is the answer; I will say the Gospel is.

However, the way I define “patriarchy” is biblical, the experience you are referring to is likely not (though I don’t want to make assumptions again). I do realize there are a few nuts out there defining patriarchy in all sorts of wicked, selfish ways (blind obedience, polygamy etc.), but that’s NOT patriarchy! Usually these groups are outside of any organized denomination, and at times are not even part of a church at all. I’ve heard some of the wild stories and they make me sick. But please don’t lump everyone together.

You said:

“There are many Christians who are attempting to shackle women again. This happens behind the veil of so-called "biblical patriarchy," the Quiverfull movement and Dominion theology.”

Again, I don’t know what you mean by “shackle women.” That is the kind of thing I was trying to clarify with you. Some people think it “shackles” women if they can’t be pastors or Marines.

Either way, the implication of the various statements in your comment was that anyone who embraces the beliefs of biblical patriarchy, Dominion theology, or the Quiverfull movement is abusive and attempting to shackle women.

In addition, I have no idea how you’re defining these three labels, since, from my experience, those who live it and those who are critical of those who live it define the terms in drastically different ways.

Again, Elizabeth, I pray you hear my heart. I did not mean to offend you or hurt you in any way. I am simply trying to show you that your pain didn’t come from biblical teaching – it came from sin.

Jennifer, I hope that my response didn't come across as being harsh or dogmatic as if you have to agree with me. I hope that you understand what I meant by "independent" in the way that I was using it. You may have had a different usage in mind.

No problem at all, Mrs. Webfoot, thank you :) We were, in fact, using a different definition for the word independence; I only mentioned your daughter because I find her to be a good example of mature womanhood. For me, independence simply meant moving out and living on one's own (or woth a spouse) as adults do eventually.

(Since I more or less said the same thing in my last comment, Stacy, please don't feel the need to post it; I feel this one is more appropriate. Thank you!)

I followed a link from another blog highlighting this article as a must-read. I am new to your blog and wanted to say hello,and that I appreciated the very good and valid points you made in your article.

The one caveat I would make, which would not contradict anything you wrote, but perhaps be an addendum, is to remember that, sadly, the church over the centuries has often been corrupted in various forms by the world's thinking. Whether it be devotion to an unjust political cause or leader, or racial or cultural bigotry, or any number of social or moral injustices, sadly we have seen the church fail to hold Christ's standard perfectly, and the body has had cause to repent over these issues across time.

Sadly, the same can be said about valuing women. You make an excellent point that women fair better in Christian societies than in those of other religions. That does not mean, however, that the church over time has had nothing to repent of in it's attitudes towards women. Christians have been the majority in western societies where women had not enough protection before the law when it came to physical abuse by their husbands, were not offered basic protections as individuals before the law, and were ultimately not viewed a 'equals' to men by society.

Living in a post-feminist society, I can embrace God's calling to me to as a wife, a home maker, and a mother, and be confident that a different role than my husband does not make me inferior to him. Sadly, though, I do not believe that same understanding was present in earlier generations for all Christian women. Just recently I was watching an episode of a 1950s family sitcom, which I quite enjoy, but was unsettled by the fact that when the teenage daughter expressed interest in a career in sciences, she was not admonished against it by her parents because a career as a wife and a mother was preferred track for her as a woman, but because she would be not up to the task intellectually because she was a female. These attitudes have been pervasive in the past, and have been supported by Christians, and they are attitudes that should be recognized as unbiblical and something that the church needed to repent of and change.

You are right that feminism was not the answer to this problem of devaluing women as different. My heroes of women's history are not Anthony and Stanton, for reasons mentioned above, but rather women like the Beecher sisters, who campaigned that a woman's contribution in the home and in the feminine realms of society were just as important as the contributions of men, and thus should be valued as such. But it's important to remember that these women were still reformers in their day, advocating for the important of education for women when that was still rather debatable.

I bring all of this up because as someone who came to CHrist in her adulthood, and as a recovering feminist myself, I know the importance of Christians being willing to say that the church has not been perfect in living out Christ's example of valuing women equally with men, and that because of that poor witness it is easy for the outsider to confuse worldly thinking with what the bible actually has to say about the value of women. Scripture teaches us that it is ont our roles that define us and give us value, but the fact that we are made in God's image and are redeemed by Christ. That has not always been the message of the world, however, nor of the church, in relation to the value and equality of women, and is sometihng I believe if we want to be light and salt for Christ in a post-feminist world, that we have to be willing to own, and point with humility to the perfect example of Christ, rather than the imperfect example of Christendom.

Sorry that was so long, love the blog and I'll be back again for sure!

I’m new to your website and I love it! Thanks Nicole for your post too. I’m worried about what we think about “independent” living. True independence was experienced by pilgrims and some individuals who climb mountains, but few do this alone. The most recent example is the 17 year old girl who tried to sail around the world alone. I love the idea that I can do things by myself and succeed, but we have to realize that we all play roles in society and we all have supportive networks. What we are discussing then is how to make the right choice in our roles in society and what communities we will participate in….Christian ones, pagan ones, college, careers, living on mountain tops, hermit habitat?